U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

86–197 PDF 2014

OBAMACARE IMPLEMENTATION, THE BROKEN 

PROMISE: IF YOU LIKE YOUR CURRENT PLAN 

YOU CAN KEEP IT 

FIELD HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

DECEMBER 6, 2013 

Serial No. 113–70 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

http://www.house.gov/reform 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California, Chairman 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

PATRICK T. MCHENRY, North Carolina 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan 

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona 

PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas 

DOC HASTINGS, Washington 

CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming 

ROB WOODALL, Georgia 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

DOUG COLLINS, Georgia 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

KERRY L. BENTIVOLIO, Michigan 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 

JIM COOPER, Tennessee 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

JACKIE SPEIER, California 

MATTHEW A. CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

TONY CARDENAS, California 

STEVEN A. HORSFORD, Nevada 

MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico 

Vacancy 

LAWRENCE J. BRADY, Staff Director 

JOHN D. CUADERES, Deputy Staff Director 

STEPHEN CASTOR, General Counsel 

LINDA A. GOOD, Chief Clerk 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on December 6, 2013 ........................................................................ 1 

WITNESSES 

Ms. Juli Dalton, Healthcare worker 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 9 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 12 

Ms. Diana Robinson, Retired Administrative Assistant 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 16 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 18 

Dr. Steve Montgomery, Veterinarian 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 19 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 21 

Ms. Christie Hamman, Realtor 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 22 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 24 

(1) 

OBAMACARE IMPLEMENTATION, THE BROKEN PROMISE: IF YOU LIKE YOUR CURRENT PLAN YOU CAN KEEP IT 

Friday, December 6, 2013 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m., in City Council Chambers, Apache Junction, Arizona, Hon. Darrell E. Issa 

[chairman of the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Issa and Gosar. 

Also Present: Representatives Franks and Schweikert. 

Staff Present: Drew Colliatie, Professional Staff Member; John 

Cuaderes, Deputy Staff Director; Linda Good, Chief Clerk; Meinan 

Goto, Professional Staff Member; Rebecca Watkins, Communications Director. 

Chairman ISSA. The committee will come to order. 

The Oversight Committee exists to secure two fundamental principles. First, Americans have a right to know that the money 

Washington takes from them is well spent. And second, Americans 

deserve an efficient, effective government that works for them. Our 

duty on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee is to 

protect these rights. Our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to taxpayers, because taxpayers have a right to 

know what they get from their government. Our job is to work tirelessly in partnership with citizen watchdogs to deliver the facts to 

the American people and bring genuine reform to the Federal bureaucracy. 

Today’s hearing is part of a continuing series of field hearings 

done throughout the country to reach out and hear from American 

people outside the Beltway about what their challenges are with 

the Affordable Care Act. In Washington we have brought in specialists from all over the country to deal with failures of the 

website, unintended consequences of changes in the law, the effects 

in some cases—Mr. Franks and I have worked particularly on the 

effects of changes made by the President that may not be within 

his constitutional authority. 

But here, we have come to listen to people who are directly affected by the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. 

I want to note for the record, these are bipartisan hearings, no 

different than Washington. However, so far, three out of three 

times, my Democratic colleagues have chosen not to participate or 

even ask for a witness to support an alternate point of view. I regret that. America is best served when all opinions are heard. For 

2 

that reason, we will include any insertions by individuals who have 

different stories in the record. We want to know where the Affordable Care Act is doing good in addition to the areas in which it is 

causing higher cost or driving people out of the healthcare they 

wanted. 

I want to particularly thank today Congressman Gosar because 

we are here in Apache Junction thanks to the city and the county, 

but also thanks to the congressman who helped so much in arranging this. Congressman Gosar is now becoming a senior member of 

the committee. He is highly involved in the day-to-day of the committee and is one of our most constant participants both during 

and outside of the hearing process. 

Additionally, I want to welcome and ask unanimous consent that 

Mr. Franks be allowed to participate in this hearing even though 

he is not a member of the committee, and without objection, that 

is so ordered. 

The fact is, while the President and other authors of the Affordable Care Act repeatedly promised if you like your healthcare plan 

you can keep it, if you like your doctor you can keep him, it simply 

isn’t turning out to be true, no more than those who were told that 

there was oceanfront property here in Phoenix. The fact is, no matter what you were promised, the stark reality of far more people 

losing their healthcare than getting replacement healthcare, far 

less people finding the asset versus the liability of the Affordable 

Care Act. 

It doesn’t change the fact that a law is a law, and we are sworn 

to uphold and defend the Constitution and the statutes as they are 

passed. For that reason, we want to know what is wrong, what is 

happening, and propose legislation that would allow us to find a 

way to bring what was the stated purpose of the Affordable Care 

Act, which was affordable care, to the American people. 

All three of us on the dais here today share one common view, 

and that is that government intervention, government’s attempt to 

usurp the private sector—thank you, and by unanimous consent, 

you also will be included. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Proving you will let anyone sit down with you. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman ISSA. Especially if you are local and popular. 

The fact is, we have this obligation and we are here today to help 

fulfill it. For every individual that reported the Affordable Care Act 

enrollment in the state and Federal exchanges, more have received 

cancellation notices. We are not limiting our investigation to government agencies and government intentions and government meddling in what was already a difficult and expensive private-sector 

market. The committee has sent to 15 insurance companies asking 

them what did they know and when did they know it. 

But clearly, the cancellations that are coming now were known 

well before October 1st and were not made available to the American people. I have no doubt if the American people had known the 

level of cancellations, the lack of availability, the fact that the 

promise that you can keep the healthcare plan you had when, in 

fact, in every state they are disappearing, and in my state, California, they were required to disappear by agreement with the 

3 

state regulatory agency in order to participate in the new government exchange sponsored by California. 

So here we are in Arizona where, in many ways, you are fortunate, at least you think you are, because you don’t have a state exchange further meddling in implementing Obamacare, but you do 

have the fact that the Affordable Care Act, which promised to give 

you more choice and more competition, didn’t. 

According to research from the Heritage Foundation, and this is 

very recent, there are currently 11 insurers offering coverage in the 

Arizona individual market. This decrease in market competition in 

Arizona will lead to higher cost of health insurance. The fact is the 

exchanges have signed up only 738 people in the Federal exchange 

in the first month of operation. 

The Manhattan Institute published a state-by-state analysis of 

the impact of the Affordable Care Act premiums. According to this 

report, in the average state, the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare 

will increase underlying payments by 41 percent. However, in Arizona, the Manhattan Institute estimates at least 51 percent increase in the first year. 

One of the challenges the Affordable Care Act constantly has is 

you go online or you talk to your insurer and they do have a program that costs somewhat similar to your previous year. Then you 

discover that your out-of-pocket costs have risen, the amount you 

pay before anything gets paid, by $2,000, $3,000, $4,000, $5,000. 

We did not sign up for an affordable care that simply said the insurance rate will be about the same and you will get less coverage, 

and you will have more out-of-pocket expenses. And yet, that is 

what we are finding again and again. 

Predictable but unintended when you write a law that says individuals working under 30 hours a week need not be covered by the 

mandatory healthcare even though they have a mandatory responsibility to buy. This is a double whammy. Part-time employees at 

places like Starbucks and others who previously had healthcare 

may not have it, and yet they have a mandate to buy it, the worst 

of all worlds. 

Lastly, most people here in Arizona know that the biggest source 

for employment will, in fact, be companies who employ less than 

50 individuals, and all startups that are really and truly startups 

start with less than 50 employees. And yet, that very group exempted from it means that as the prices go up and it is less affordable, many individuals and companies, small businesses less than 

50, who previously had plans, often with health savings accounts 

and other benefits they liked, are losing them. Again, unintended 

consequences of government intervention. 

When the President’s signature law, the Affordable Care Act, 

was passed three-and-a-half years ago along 100 percent partisan 

lines, the Act gave the administration virtually unlimited funds to 

do what it wanted and, more than three years later, time to complete all their work. While the control was all theirs, so, in fact, 

is the question why is it in sworn testimony before this committee 

no one would take direct responsibility for any of the failures of the 

healthcare.gov website? In fact, we had two chief information officers, both of whom said they had nothing to really do with it other 

than showing up to meetings. 

4 

That kind of passing the buck, in addition to what you will hear 

today about the adverse effects to people seeking care, has to be 

changed. The Affordable Care Act will require legislative changes. 

We believe it requires legislative changes in order to get government responsible with your money. 

The launch of one of the more famous websites, the eBay auction 

house, over more than six years spent approximately $300 million 

and conducted millions and millions of real-time live auctions for 

a fraction of the cost of the failed Affordable Care site. That is just 

the tip of the iceberg of what happens when government gets your 

money and is not held accountable to the American people. 

Today we will do the best we can to bring transparency to the 

failures of the Affordable Care Act so the American people can 

begin appropriately demanding that we take action to fix a broken 

law. 

And with that, I go to Congressman Gosar for his opening statement. 

Mr. GOSAR. Well, thank you, Chairman. 

First I would like to thank Chairman Issa for making the trip 

to Arizona and holding today’s hearing. I strongly believe congressional committees should come out to its members’ home states and 

hear directly from our constituents regarding the struggles that 

they face from the policies that Congress enacts. 

I know there are a lot of demands on your time, as well as the 

committee’s time, and I deeply appreciate and am honored that we 

are able to hold this field hearing here in Arizona’s 4th Congressional District. 

I would also like to thank my two colleagues, Congressman Trent 

Franks and David Schweikert, for taking time out of their busy 

Friday for this hearing, but it is an important hearing in regards 

to health which all of us have to have some concerns about. 

We are all committed to repealing this onerous law and replacing 

it with policies that increase access to care while decreasing premiums. 

Finally, I would like to thank all of you for holding us accountable, coming out on your Friday and being part of a democratic republic that holds your elected officials accountable. I know a lot of 

people could not be here from the long distances, but as the chairman said, we would love to have your stories be brought into the 

record, and you can reach out to my staff. Penny Pew is in the 

front room if you would like to direct your stories accordingly. 

We are about understanding what is actually happening with 

what I call the Unaffordable Care Act. Over the past few months, 

my office has been inundated by calls, emails, tweets, and 

Facebook posts from Arizonans frustrated with Obamacare implementation. Since its enactment, the President has made a variety 

of promises to the American people that have not been, frankly, 

true. These folks are now dealing with lots of problems—lack of 

choices, higher premiums, higher co-pays, and less access to care 

that they need. In rural Arizona, these struggles are particularly 

amplified in communities that simply already have limited access 

to healthcare providers and an unemployment rate that exceeds 

the state and nationwide average. 

5 

Obamacare is a train wreck, full of broken promises that is increasing healthcare costs and interfering with the doctor-patient 

relationship. Obamacare must be repealed and must be, importantly, replaced. That is why I am not shy about saying there is 

a replacement, and I have been a very foremost part of that replacement. 

I have worked along with six of my house Republican healthcare 

colleagues for a replacement plan called the American Healthcare 

Reform Act, and it is H.R. 3121 if you would like to find it. This 

is something I am not shy about. 

This initiative does five principal things. It starts with a patientcentered, patient-friendly healthcare, not a government dictated. It 

spurs competition to lower healthcare costs by allowing Americans 

to purchase healthcare insurance across state lines and enabling 

small businesses to pool together and get the same buying power 

as large corporations. 

It starts with tax reform. It reforms medical malpractice laws in 

a commonsense way that limits trial lawyer fees and non-economic 

damages while maintaining strong protections for the patient. 

It also takes into account tax reforms which allow families and 

individuals to deduct healthcare costs, just like companies do, leveling the playing field and providing all Americans with a standard 

deduction for healthcare insurance. 

It expands access to health savings accounts, HSAs, increasing 

the amount of pre-tax dollars individuals can deposit in portable 

savings accounts to be used for healthcare expenses, and it safeguards individuals with pre-existing conditions from being discriminated against purchasing health insurance while bolstering statebased high-risk pools and extending HIPAA guarantees for availability of protections. 

Our bill opens up the market, allowing Americans to purchase 

health insurance across state lines, and it drives down the cost, expands access to these health savings accounts that are a part of a 

patient’s budget. 

This bill is pragmatic. It is practical and portable, a free-market 

alternative to the current healthcare system that does not impose 

more taxes and mandates on American families. It facilitates a system that leaves patients and physicians in the driver’s seat, where 

they belong. It has garnered the support of the majority of my Republican colleagues in the House, and I hope we will ultimately 

enact it into law. 

Thank you again, everyone, for coming out here today. It is a 

pleasure to see so many smiling faces. I think with the blue sky, 

there is a smiling face everywhere in Arizona. 

And, Mr. Chairman, we actually did buy oceanfront property in 

Arizona. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GOSAR. I yield back. 

[Applause.] 

Chairman ISSA. We now go to my friend and fellow member of 

the Judiciary Committee and chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee, Mr. Franks. 

Mr. FRANKS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will do like so 

many have done whenever they sit on a committee with you, and 

6 

that is to express their own appreciation for your leadership. It is 

not an easy thing being a captain of accountability in the Congress. 

It is something that brings with it great criticism from many corners, and it is very hard to be intense enough to maintain true accountability and still maintain integrity in the process. 

But Chairman Darrell Issa has done that in an exemplary way, 

and I appreciate him deeply, and I think that this country will 

have a better hope and a better future for his having come the way 

of Washington, D.C. 

And I would also like to express gratitude to David Schweikert 

and to Paul Gosar. These are not only fellow colleagues in Congress 

from Arizona, but they are precious friends. We are so fortunate 

that our delegation, at least those represented on this dais, have 

a sincere commonality and comity toward each other and commitment to this country. I would suggest to you that if the rest of Congress reflected the philosophy and the heart that Paul Gosar and 

David Schweikert have, and Chairman Issa, that I would simply be 

inclined to come home and be with my children more, because I 

could do that with a clear conscience. 

Today, the subject primarily is the Affordable Care Act, and I 

will be pretty brief here. Some of the things have already been expressed very eloquently by our chairman. But Mr. Obama famously 

and repeatedly promised Americans who liked their healthcare 

plans that they could keep them. Now, as of November 19th, nearly 

5 million health insurance policies in 32 states have already been 

canceled, and there are indications that that is the tip of the iceberg. 

He said if you liked your doctors, you could keep them. Now we 

see stories in the Washington Post about insurers restricting the 

doctors and hospitals available to patients in order to keep the 

costs from the Affordable Care Act down, Obamacare down. Mr. 

Obama promised to lower premiums by up to $2,500 per family. 

But an analysis by the Manhattan Institute, as Chairman Issa 

said, showed that on the average Obamacare will increase premiums by 41 percent. And it is especially important to repeat that, 

in Arizona, that rate is 51 percent. That is pretty profound for 

something that was to save us money. 

The price tag for this dramatic worsening of our healthcare system, a $2 trillion increase in Federal spending over the next 10 

years. 

Now, I just have to say to you, for the leader of the free world 

to make those statements and then to back away from them or to 

see them clearly in error before the entire country either reflects 

an error in judgment or a lapse in judgment on his part, or veracity, one of the two, or both. In either case, they represent a significant issue to the American people. If both are true, then the implications are fairly sobering, especially when we begin to see negotiations going forward with the Islamic Republic of Iran on the potential of jihad gaining potential access to nuclear weapons. 

It is a very significant thing for the people of this country. We 

have two choices, two ways to try to see good policy come about. 

We either have to elect the right people, or we have to try to encourage the wrong people to do right things. And I would suggest 

to you that the latter equation is the one before us now. We have 

7 

to try and see if we can get this administration to go in a better 

direction. 

With that, I believe that there is a hope out there that the courts 

will act on the unconstitutionality in many areas of the Affordable 

Care Act. In 2010, the Supreme Court held Obamacare as a tax. 

The Origination Clause of the Constitution, found in Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution states, ‘‘All bills for raising revenue shall 

originate in the House of Representatives.’’ I will say to you that 

that goes back to the very genesis of our Constitution. It is what 

allowed us to come together as a country and actually have a Constitution in the first place, to make sure that government’s most coercive, most potentially dangerous power, that of taxation, was 

kept in the body that was most responsive to the people and where 

the people had the ability to make their voice known as quickly as 

possible, that being the House of Representatives. We never would 

have had the Constitution come together, there never would have 

been a compromise at that time for the Constitution that we have 

to actually exist apart from that clause. 

Now, in creating Obamacare, the Senate took an entirely unrelated bill that did not raise tax revenues, that was not germane to 

the Affordable Care Act, and struck everything but the number and 

injected the Affordable Care Act in calling it the Senate Healthcare 

Act. Every provision of Obamacare originated in the Senate. 

Some of us now, there are 43 of us that have signed amicus 

briefs before the Circuit Court in Washington, D.C. to try to challenge that on constitutional grounds. If the Senate in the future 

can take any bill and strike all of its contents and raise taxes as 

high as the Affordable Care Act has done—in some cases the people suggested it is the highest tax increase in history—if they can 

do that, then the Origination Clause, my friends, is a dead letter. 

It has no place anymore in the Constitution. So they have a pretty 

stark choice before them. 

With that, I still have some hope. Unfortunately, this president 

is now trying to stack the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals with nominees, and the Senate has acquiesced with that effort in doing what 

they call the ‘‘nuclear option’’ to make it to where Republicans or 

the minority does not have a say in the confirmation process, as 

they once did. 

But I still believe that we have great hope, and my judgment is 

that the American people are a lot more in control of their faculties 

than some politicians think, and I hope, as Winston Churchill said, 

the American people always do the right thing after they have exhausted every other possibility. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. FRANKS. My hope is that we have now seen that we have exhausted some of our possibilities with this administration and we 

need to do everything that we can to change direction. 

With that, I am grateful, Mr. Chairman, for your forbearance, 

and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. 

I welcome all of you. I am grateful that each person is here. 

Thank you. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

[Applause.] 

8 

Chairman ISSA. It is often said that if you ask a carpenter to do 

something for you, undoubtedly it will include a hammer and a 

saw. So when you bring a constitutional scholar in, someone who 

has worked so much on that issue, there is no question what will 

be part of the solution. 

And with that, going to Congressman Schweikert, who is a defender of small business, a leader on the Small Business Committee, in addition to Science. I have no doubt that his knowledge 

of the impact to Arizona business is unparalleled. 

Mr. Schweikert? 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, Darrell, it is fun to have you 

out here. Sorry about the beachfront crack, but we are waiting for 

the earthquake where we do get the beachfront property. 

Chairman ISSA. But we only know that it will split. We don’t 

know if we will both get an ocean out of it. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. You know, I am willing to split the difference 

with you. 

Chairman ISSA. The question is, who gets the river. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Don’t start that. Please, don’t start that. 

For those of you know Arizona history, we once had to send our 

army, all 12 of them, to the border to keep them from stealing our 

water. 

To Paul and Trent, we have something unique in Arizona right 

now, at least on our side. We actually have a delegation that actually likes each other. You would be amazed how much easier it is 

to work when you have teams around you that actually play nice. 

Darrell and for everyone that is here, thank you. You are actually in one of the most beautiful pieces of desert, I think, in the 

country. 

I think it was on Wednesday we held an oversight hearing in 

Small Business, and much of the discussion here today will be 

about your access to your doctor, the affordability of your 

healthcare. We held a hearing on something they call the business 

aggregation rule and what it is doing in a cascade effect of crushing 

small businesses. 

So you have a business, you invest in your son’s business, and 

as a family partnership you put a little money into a Subway shop 

and do this, you have to keep track of all the number of employees 

in everything you are touching. And if you hit the 50 people, all 

of your businesses now fall under the new command and control 

system. 

We had a series of testimony. Even the witness for the Democrats agreed that this was stifling growth and crushing small businesses, and now CPAs and advisors all over the country are advising people, saying you can’t even invest with your kids anymore for 

the danger it might have to the current businesses. 

The layer after layer after layer that we are discovering, or at 

least we are finally now getting our friends, our brothers and sisters in the media to start reaching out and helping us expose, there 

is so much more to come. Wait until the beginning of the new year 

when you start to see what has happened to the actuarial portfolios 

9 

of the distribution of risk within our healthcare industries and 

what is going to be happening there. 

I think, actually, we may have done incredible damage to our future markets and our future availability of healthcare, and at least 

we are finally getting help from both the media but also from the 

public reaching out and saying I am embracing, I am starting to 

understand what we have been talking about for the last couple of 

years, and now with what is happening to so many of our brothers 

and sisters around us, sadly enough, you are getting to experience. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

All members may have seven days in which to submit opening 

statements and extraneous material for the record. Additionally, 

the record will be open for participation of individuals here today 

to submit information for the same seven days. 

Chairman ISSA. Pursuant to the rule, I ask unanimous consent 

that the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Franks, and the gentleman 

also from Arizona, Mr. Schweikert, be allowed to participate in this 

hearing and ask questions. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

We now welcome our panel of witnesses. Normally, when we introduce people in Washington, we are introducing them with lofty 

titles, Ph.D.’s, although we do have an M.D. here, and the story is 

what institute, what association, what think tank are you from. 

Here today, the most important part of the introduction is the city 

you are from more than, in fact, any other title. 

We are honored to have Mrs. Juli Dalton from Prescott, Arizona; 

Ms. Diana Robinson from Chino Valley, Arizona; Dr. Steven Montgomery, who is a veterinarian from Blythe, California; and Mrs. 

Christie Hamman, also from Prescott, Arizona. 

This is a hearing, and pursuant to our rules, all members must 

be sworn. Would you please rise and raise your right hand? 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 

here today will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth? 

Please be seated. 

Let the record reflect that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

We have a little machine up here, and it is universally understood green means go as long as you want, yellow means hurry up 

through the intersection, and red means stop on the other side of 

the intersection. So if you would please stay as close to those lights 

as I am sure you did driving here today, it would be appreciated. 

And with that, I believe we are starting with Mrs. Dalton. 

STATEMENT OF JULI DALTON 

Ms. DALTON. Thank you. As you said, my name is Juli Dalton. 

I am 46 years old. I come from Prescott, Arizona. My husband and 

I live there. We have three children there. We are very active in 

our community and in our church and we believe that it is a sacred 

obligation to take care of ourselves, as reflected in our own Declaration of Independence, that we have the God-given right to pursue life, liberty and happiness, and to provide for ourselves and our 

own in the way that we see fit and the way that we feel is best. 

10 

In that spirit of self-reliance, we decided in 2011 that we needed 

to purchase health insurance for our family. We felt uncertain 

about the future. We didn’t know what Obamacare was going to 

hold for us, so we thought that it was prudent that we should get 

ourselves prepared and purchase a plan. 

Our president had assured us that if we had a plan that we liked 

that we could keep it, and so we felt that it was prudent to go 

ahead and provide that for our family. What he didn’t tell us was 

that in 2010 there was a deadline, that if we didn’t meet that, we 

would not be grandfathered in. We didn’t understand that. That 

was never made clear to us. 

Our agent worked very hard to help us find something that was 

just right for us. We chose a plan that had a $375 premium. Under 

this plan, our children were covered until they were 30 years old, 

which is better than what we are being told Obamacare provides. 

We already had that. We had better than that. 

Each member of the family had a $5 million cap on benefits. We 

felt very secure about that. Prescription coverage was good. We 

were healthy, and we had exactly what we needed. 

In October of this year, our agent called us, and this is interesting. It wasn’t Blue Cross Blue Shield that called us. It was our 

agent that informed us that we were about to lose the plan that 

we had worked so hard to find. Through the Affordable Care Act, 

it was no longer going to be made available to us. He told us that 

starting the first of the year, our cost would be $1,180 a month, 

which is calculated to be a 320 percent increase over what we 

worked so hard to provide for ourselves. 

He offered to rewrite the plan for us so that we could at least 

buy seven months. So we were reduced to planning for our family 

seven months at a time. 

Since then the rules have changed again, and we were informed 

that Blue Cross is now extending the renewal date to December 

31st of 2014, which is great, but that means six days after Christmas next year we are going to receive that huge increase in our 

premium. 

I was asked to comment on how these things impact our family. 

We could opt to pay the 320 percent increase in our premium in 

2014, but that would be $800 additional a month that would have 

to come out of the family budget. I would like to impress upon you 

what the value is to us of $800. 

It means that we would have to sell both of our cars, or we could 

opt to sell our home and move in with my brother-in-law. We could 

get a second and third job to pay for health insurance. I could 

choose to save money by never going to see my dad again, who 

lives far away. We could suspend all charitable giving, which is 

substantial for our family, and we feel that that is a sacred obligation that we take seriously. 

None of these options are workable. 

We could opt to purchase insurance through the government subsidized exchanges, but for a family of four at our income level, living in Yavapai County, the subsidy is only $252 a month, which 

would still mean that we would experience a 250 percent increase 

if we were to purchase on the exchanges. 

11 

Additionally, in Yavapai County, we have been informed that 

three of the five major insurance carriers operating in Arizona have 

pulled out of the exchanges in Yavapai County completely, which 

effectively reduces our ability to find good, competitive pricing on 

the exchange by 75 percent. 

To stay within our budget, we could choose to drop our insurance 

altogether and pay the penalty. This looks good on paper, but the 

reality is that when my husband and I do get sick, which now in 

our middle age is more and more likely as we go along, serious disease has the potential to completely wipe us out financially, and in 

the end we could lose everything. 

In short, at this point, we have no good options. 

Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Dalton follows:] 

12 


Insert offset folio 1 here 86197.001

I thank the honorable Chairman Issa for the invitation to 

address the distinguished men and women of this body today. 

I have been asked to speak to you about The Affordable Care 

Act and the impact that it is having on our family. I sincerely 

hope that my remarks will be helpful to you as you struggle to 

fix the horrible situation we are in with regards to health 

insurance in this country. 

By way of introduction, my name is Juli Anne Dalton. I am 46 

years old. My husband and I are the parents of 3 fine sons. We 

live in Prescott AZ where my husband owns a small business 

which he purchased from his father in 2000. 

We are very active in our community and in our church and we 

believe that it is our sacred obligation to first take care of our 

own needs and then to use our means to assist others. We try 

to live virtuous lives in meaningful service to others and invest 

of our time, talents, and treasure on a regular basis. 

In that same spirit of self reliance, we decided in 2011 that we 

needed to purchase health insurance. We felt uncertain about 

how the future would unfold with the changes in the 

Affordable Care Act that were sure to come. But our president 

had assured us that if we had a plan and we liked it we could 

keep it. So we felt it prudent to purchase a good plan while we 

still could. 

Our agent worked very hard to find us something that was just 

right for us. We chose a plan with a $375 premium. Under this 

plan, our children were covered until they were 30 years old. 

Each member of the family had a 5 million dollar cap on 

benefits. The deductible was high but the prescription 

coverage was good. We were all healthy, so the plan was a 

perfect fit for us. 
13 


Insert offset folio 2 here 86197.002

When we enrolled, Blue Cross tried to deny me for what they 

determined to be a pre existing condition, but we were able to 

submit additional documentation provided by our doctor and 

secure coverage for ourselves and for two of our three boys. 

We felt very good about the fact that, in the event of a 

catastrophic injury or illness, we had been able to provide 

protection for our family at a price we could afford. 

In October of this year, our agent called and told us that our 

plan was no longer going to be available under the Affordable 

Care Act. He told us that, starting the first of the year, it would 

cost us $1,180 for a similar plan under the new rules. To put 

that into perspective for you, $1,180 is about the same size as 

the mortgage payment on our home. I did some calculations 

and discovered that this $800 a month difference amounts to 

an almost a 320% increase in our premium. 

Our agent offered to rewrite our old plan for us so that we 

could at least keep it for 7 more months. At the time I thought 

how sad it was that we can only plan for our family's security 

seven months at a time. Seven more months and then what? 

Since that time, the rules of the game have changed again and 

we have been told that BCBS is now extending the renewal 

date to December 2014 for everyone. But no one knows what 

will happen after that. If something is not done our premiums 

will skyrocket just 9 days before Christmas next year. 

To this day Blue Cross Blue Shield has made no attempt to 

contact us or inform us of what is happening with our plan. If 

it weren't for our agent's willingness to look out for our best 

interest, we would still be in the dark about what is going on. 
14 


Insert offset folio 3 here 86197.003

I was asked to comment on how these changes impact our 

family's bottom line and discuss with you what our options are 

at this point. 

We could opt to pay the 320% increase in our premium. But 

where would this additional 800 dollars a month come from? I 

would like to help you all understand what the value of $800 is 

to our family. $800 is the cost of our two car payments. We 

could sell both of our cars. We could save $800 by selling our 

house and moving in with my husband's brother. We could get 

a second job just to pay for our health insurance. I could 

choose to save money on occasional travel expenses and opt to 

never see my dad again. 

We could suspend all charitable giving, or we could raise the 

fees atthe dental office ... none of these options are workable. 

One of our sons will be serving a two year mission to Chile 

beginning in January, which will cost $400 a month. Where 

will that money come from now? Our oldest son is very bright 

and is on full scholarship to Brigham Young University where 

he is on track for a career in medicine. We will not be able to 

help him financially. 

We could opt to purchase insurance through the government 

subsidized exchanges, but for a family of four with our income 

level, living in Yavapai County, the subsidy would only be $252 

a month, leaving that 320% increase in premium still well 

beyond our reach. Besides that, we find the subsidy option to 

be morally abhorrent. Why should we need to bankrupt our 

children and grandchildren to pay for something which, until 

the government interfered, we could afford to purchase 

ourselves? 
15 


Insert offset folio 4 here 86197.004

To stay within our budget we could choose to drop our 

insurance altogether and opt to pay the penalt instead. This 

looks good on paper, but the reality is that my husband and I 

are entering the time in our lives when our need for health care, 

both preventative and otherwise, will begin to increase. 

In short, we have no good options. 

Why is our government doing this to us? We were happy 

taking care of our own needs. We take care of our neighbors. 

We have contributed positively to society. We have raised 

three fine young men who will also make significant positive 

contributions in the future. For which of these things has our 

government seen fit to punish us? And where will it end? 

Thank you. 

Other facts to mention during questions: 

• Our agent has informed us that three of the five major 

insurance carriers operating in Arizona have pulled out of 

the exchanges in Yavapai County, effectively reducing our 

ability to find good competitive prices on the exchange by 

75% and narrowing our choices in the Yavapai County 

Exchange to only two companies. 
16 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

Mrs. Robinson? 

STATEMENT OF DIANA ROBINSON 

Ms. ROBINSON. Thank you. 

When I first learned about Obamacare several years ago, I was 

hopeful but suspicious. All I could do was wait and see how it 

would affect me. 

At the beginning of this year the first warning sign of things to 

come arrived in the mail when my then insurer, United Health 

Care, informed me that my premiums would be doubling. Knowing 

that I could not afford a higher rate, I found the insurance I currently have, which is a policy with Humana for $280 per month 

with a $5,000 deductible, which is barely affordable. 

When healthcare.gov was made available, I got online to find out 

what I would be looking at when the Affordable Care Act took effect. I was stunned. The premiums were well out of my budget, and 

that was just for the Bronze plans. Since my annual income falls 

under the $46,000 cap, I then applied for a subsidy, which I did 

not want to do. I was happy with my Humana policy and didn’t 

want to take government aid for something I did not want in the 

first place. 

I submitted the information on October 31st, Halloween, which 

is a fitting day to do so since I was quickly learning how scary 

Obamacare really was. 

Then I waited, and I waited. After multiple phone calls to 

healthcare.gov, I finally learned last Tuesday that I do qualify for 

a subsidy of $226 per month. After reviewing the Marketplace 

plans I would be able to get insurance for $529 per month, which, 

minus the subsidy, would cost me $303, slightly over my current 

plan. This sounded feasible, until I compared the proposed plan 

and my current one. Maximum out-of-pocket for the ACA plan 

would cost me $1,350 more per year, with an additional $276 in 

premiums. Why would I want to change? 

Needless to say, I am choosing to keep my current plan until the 

end of 2014, when I will be forced to change. So much for the ‘‘if 

you like your current plan you can keep it’’ promise. 

In the meantime, I received a letter from Humana telling me 

that I had two options for 2014 if I wanted to keep my policy with 

them. I could keep my current plan at $280 per month or switch 

to an ACA-compliant policy at $738 per month. Or—excuse me— 

yes, per month. I was shocked. Again, needless to say, I will be 

sticking with my current policy. More disturbing, the difference in 

the premiums between the two plans was $5,547.12. 

Another significant issue for me is that my income was greatly 

reduced one year ago when I became single. I am now faced with 

the possibility of going back to work. However, doing so would most 

likely push me over the annual $46,000 subsidy cap, eliminating 

my subsidy. I would then be working mainly to pay for my 

healthcare premium. 

I now realize the Affordable Care Act has been misnamed. And 

I agree with you, Representative Gosar. It should have been renamed the Unaffordable Health Care Act. 

17 

Thank you for allowing me to share my story, and I am so grateful to have gentlemen such as you representing us. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Robinson follows:] 

18 


Insert offset folio 5 here 86197.005

Testimony on Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) 

by Diana Robinson 

1216/2013 

When I first learned about Obamacare several years ago I was hopeful but suspicious. All I could do 

was wait and see how it would affect me. 

At the beginning of this year the first warning sign of things to come arrived in the mail when my then 

insurer, United Health Care, informed me that my premiums would be doubling. Knowing I could not 

afford a higher rate I found the insurance that I currently have: A policy with Humana for $280 per 

month with a $5000 deductible. Something I can afford. 

When healthcare.gov was made available I got online to find out what I would be looking at when the 

Affordable Care Act took effect. I was stunned. The premiums were well out of my budget and that 

was just for the Bronze plans. Since my annual income falls under the $46,000 cap I then applied for 

a subsidy which I did not want to do. I was happy with my Humana policy and didn't want to take 

government aid for something I didn't want in the first place. I submitted the information on Oct. 31, 

(Halloween) a fitting day to do so since I was quickly learning how scary Obamacare really was! 

Then I waited ..... and waited .... After multiple phone calls to healthcare.gov I finally learned last 

Tuesday that I do qualify for a subsidy of $226 per month. After reviewing the Marketplace plans I 

would be able to get insurance for $529 per month, which, minus the subsidy, would cost me $303, 

slightly over my current plan. This sounded ok until I compared the proposed plan and my current 

one: Maximum out of pocket for the ACA plan would cost me $1350.00 more per year, with an 

additional $276 in premiums. Why would I want to change? 

Needless to say, I am choosing to keep my current plan until the end of 2014 when I will be forced to 

change. So much for the "if you like your current plan you can keep it" promise! 

In the meantime, I received a letter from Humana telling me that I had two options for 2014 if I wanted 

to keep my policy with them. Keep my current plan at $276.12 per month or switch to an ACA 

Compliant Policy at $738.38 per year. The deductible on the ACA plan is less but when I did the 

math my maximum out-of-pocket costs for the ACA plan would be $2297.12 more than my current 

plan. Needless to say I will be sticking with my current policy through 2014. More disturbing, the 

difference in premiums between the two plans is $5547.12! (Please see Attachment #1 in this 

packet.) 

Another significant issue for me is that my income was greatly reduced one year ago when I became 

Single, I am now faced with the possibility of going back to work. However, doing so would push me 

to or slightly over the annual $46,000 subsidy cap, eliminating my subsidy. I would then be working 

mainly to pay for my health care premiums. This is absurd. 

I now realize the Affordable Care Act has been misnamed. It should be renamed the "UnAffordabie 

Care Act." 

Thank you for allowing me to be here to share my story. 
19 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you, Ms. Robinson. 

Dr. Montgomery? 

STATEMENT OF STEVE MONTGOMERY 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Thank you. 

I enrolled in the American Medical Association Group Health 

and Life Insurance Trust health insurance program upon graduation from veterinary school in 1983. I also started a health savings 

account in connection with the plan when they first became available. The trust plan was a bona fide association plan, a designation 

given to it by some governmental agency. It was offered to AVA 

members and their families. 

The policies were underwritten by a major insurance company, 

most recently New York Life, whose participation in the health 

care market is limited to association plans. The policies were good 

ones. They were affordable, they were comprehensive, and they 

were portable. 

One could see any doctor, go to any hospital, anywhere. This is 

quite important to me as I have lived and practiced in four locations in three states in the last 30 years. 

For the past 24 years, I have lived in a very rural area of Southern California on the border of Arizona. The nearest towns to mine 

and where my doctors and hospital are located are in Arizona. Late 

last year we were informed by the trust that New York Life was 

no longer going to underwrite the plan as of January 1st of 2014. 

The reasons given, one, that our association was no longer bona 

fide. It had been stripped of that status by the Affordable Care Act. 

And two, since New York Life was providing health care to some, 

it was going to have to start providing it for everyone. New York 

Life has completely withdrawn from the health insurance business 

formally. Attempts by the trust to secure another underwriter had 

been unsuccessful. 

When the Affordable Care Act was first announced, I was not 

that concerned as President Obama and prominent members of 

Congress stated emphatically that you could keep your current 

health insurance. They were wrong, and they should have known 

that. I would perhaps excuse Ms. Pelosi since she had not yet read 

the bill, but ignorance, even in my profession, is a poor excuse. 

I have not yet secured new health insurance for myself and my 

granddaughter. My wife and I are her legal guardians. I have not 

worked too hard to do so, but in looking on the Internet at what 

is available has so far been disappointing. 

I currently pay about $6,300 per year for the two of us. Minimum 

premiums will go up to $7,400, comparable plans up to $9,000. But 

the most important thing is the out-of-pocket expenses. Copays, 

deductibles are going to be almost three times as much, and if I 

go out of network, such as crossing state lines, which I am not certain if that is going to work or not, it could be eight to nine times 

as much as I am paying now. 

Being that I am in California or in the California exchange, Blue 

Shield of California, what I have been able to see—I cannot find 

out if I can go into Arizona. It is not clear. You ask for providers 

in Arizona and it comes back as an invalid request. Therefore, if 

20 

I have to stay in California, I have to travel an extra 100 miles, 

and that is no exaggeration, to access physicians and hospitals. 

As a veterinarian, I do make a decent living. But after 30 years 

in practice, I cannot yet afford to retire. Nobody pays for my retirement but myself. No one but me pays for my health insurance. 

Obamacare is probably not going to bankrupt me, but it will certainly have an effect on my plans for the future. 

I don’t consider myself very old, and I have been fairly healthy 

my whole life, but about the last five years that has changed, as 

one gets older. And now when I need my insurance the most, it is 

being canceled. And I am no expert in the healthcare industry, but 

I did serve on a hospital board for 13 years, sitting as chairman 

for 10. My wife for the last 20 years has been CEO of a small rural 

hospital, so I am familiar with the healthcare industry, and I don’t 

think most people are really aware of how deeply and intimately 

involved the government already is in your health care, every aspect of it. 

Certainly, the administration’s call for reform is laudable. But in 

my opinion, the reason the current system is so screwed up is because the government is so involved in it, and reform really should 

be less involvement of the government rather than more. 

Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Dr. Montgomery follows:] 

21 


Insert offset folio 6 here 86197.006

I enrolled in the American Veterinary Medical Association Group 

Health and Life Insurance Trust health insurance program upon graduation 

from veterinary school in 1983. I also started a Health Savings Account in 

connection with the plan when they first became available. The Trust Plan 

was a bona fide association plan and available to A VMA members and their 

families. The policies were underwritten by a major insurance cDmpany, 

most recently New York Life, whose participation in the health care market 

VIres limited to association plans. The policies were good ones; affordable, 

comprehensive, and portable. One could see any doctor or go to any hospital 

anywhere. This was quite important as I have lived and practiced in 4 

locations in 3 states in the past 30 years. I currently live in a very rural area 

of Southern California on the border of Arizona. The nearest towns to mine, 

and where my doctors and hospital are located, are in Arizona. 

Late last year we were infonned by the Trust that New York Life was 

no longer going to underwrite the Plan as of January 1,2014. The reasons 

given were that 1) our association plan was no longer "bona fide" and 2) 

since New York Life was providing health insurance to some, it would have 

to start providing it for everyone. New York Life has completely withdrawn 

from the health care market. Attempts by the Trust to secure another 

underwriter have been unsuccessfuL 

When the Affordable Care Act was first announced I was not 

concerned, as President Obama and prominent members of Congress stated 

emphatically the you could keep your current health insurance. They were 

wrong and should have known. I would perhaps excuse Ms. Pelosi since she 

had not yet read the bill but ignorance, even in my profession, is a poor 

excuse. 

I have not yet secured new health insurance for myself and my 

granddaughter (my wife and I are legal guardians). I have not yet worked 

hard to do so but looking on the internet at what is available has so fur been 

disappointing. My greatest concern is portability. All of the plans are in 

provider networks. and it is not clear to me if these will cross state lines. If 

not, I will have to travel an extra 100 miles (no exaggeration) to the nearest 

California city for my health care. 

. As a veterinarian I make a decent living, but after 30 years in practice 

I cannot yet afford to retire. No One pays for my retirement but myself. No 

one but me pays for my health insurance. Obamacare is probably not going 

to bankrupt me but it certainly will have an effect on my plans for the future. 

Steve Montgomery DVM, Blythe, California 
22 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

[Applause.] 

Chairman ISSA. Please. 

Mrs. Hamman? 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTIE HAMMAN 

Ms. HAMMAN. Well, I thank you for the opportunity to speak to 

you today on this really very important subject to all of us. 

My name is Christie Hamman. My husband and I are both selfemployed real estate professionals in Prescott, Arizona. I am 55 

years old, and he is 58. We have been self-employed and self-insured for over 30 years. Our family has been fortunate enough to 

be in relatively good health. None of us smoke, and so our premiums have always been reasonable. 

It has been our choice to have health insurance with high 

deductibles and low premiums. This has worked well for our family. We have insurance presently through Blue Cross Blue Shield 

of Arizona. We have a $5,000 deductible per person. It is a policy 

that is designed for relatively healthy people. We have three doctor 

visits that we get copays a year, and we are allowed to have a 

health savings account where we pay for everything as we go, to 

the point of that deductible. Our premiums this last year have been $550 a month for my 

husband and I. We have a college-age daughter, and we have a 25- 

year-old son who has yet to have full coverage, to have health insurance coverage at his workplace. 

So I would say originally I wasn’t particularly enthusiastic about 

a government-run healthcare system or a mandate for insurance, 

but I understood that a lot of people in this country could not afford adequate health care and health insurance. I was sympathetic 

to this plight. I expected our premiums would rise slightly. I was 

expecting that. But I had no idea what was about to happen to our 

family. 

When President Obama repeatedly stated that if we liked our insurance we could keep it, period, I just didn’t imagine what I was 

about to walk into. 

And so I received a cancellation letter from Blue Cross Blue 

Shield in September. I honestly laid it aside and thought, well— 

because they said they would put us in another plan. So I laid it 

aside and I thought not a whole lot about it, until I finally called 

my agent. He said that we would be able to move to another Blue 

Cross Blue Shield plan, and when I talked to him he said you will 

have far better insurance than you have now, which sounded good. 

He said I would have maternity coverage and pediatric dentistry, 

both of which I would have been happy to have back in my childbearing years and child-raising years, but I do not need it now. 

He told us the plan that most resembled our plan would still 

have a $6,000 deductible per person, but my premium would now 

be $1,701 a month. To say the least, I was stunned by the increase. 

My husband and I are both in real estate. We make a good living. We don’t know from year to year what that living is going to 

be, though. So upon the advice of a number of people, I was told 

not to go into the exchange and put in any personal information. 

But they do have a calculator within the exchange that you can put 

23 

in some basic information and be given the idea of what your premium would be on the exchange. 

So I put in there that we made $95,000, a hypothetical number. 

There would be no subsidy available if you make over $94,200. My 

premium would be $1,387 a month, $16,642 for the year. It is 17.5 

percent of our income, equivalent to our housing allowance. 

I then estimated that our adjusted gross income, let’s say, was 

$89,000, and I was given an estimate of over $8,000 in subsidies 

if we made just under the $94,200. This would equal 9.5 percent 

of our household income, a huge difference for a few thousand dollars. 

If we were to under-estimate our adjusted gross and take advantage of the subsidy, we would owe it back if we made over that. 

With premium increases like this, it is a total game-changer for 

our family. The thought of healthcare premiums for healthy nonsmokers costing between 17 and 20 percent of our income is truly 

unbelievable to me. 

We have been offered a reprieve from Blue Cross Blue Shield of 

Arizona, like Mrs. Dalton said, until December of 2014. The letter 

informing us just came last week. If nothing is done about the effect that Obamacare is having on the self-insured middle class, 

then next year at this time we will be looking at these huge premium increases. This could be the first time in our lives that we 

are left uninsured or making life-changing decisions. 

This is not what our president promised us. We have worked 

hard to provide for our family. We have been responsible. We have 

paid our bills, and we pay our taxes. This is not playing out as we 

were promised. I urge you to make changes to the Affordable Care 

Act that is proving quite unaffordable for us. Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Hamman follows:] 

24 


Insert offset folio 7 here 86197.007

My name is Christie Hamman. My husband and are I are both self-employed real 

estate professionals in Prescott, Arizona. We have been self-employed and selfinsured for over 30 years. We and our children have been fortunate enough to be 

in relatively good health and non -smokers so it has always been our choice to 

have health insurance with high deductibles and lower premiums. This has 

worked well for our family. We have insurance presently through Blue Cross Blue 

Shield of Arizona with a $5000. deductible per person. It is a policy that is 

designed for relatively healthy people with well care and co-pays to doctors for a 

limited number of visits per year. We live in a smaller town with limited health 

providers and most take Blue Cross Blue Shield which is why we have had them 

for many years. The lower premiums have fit into our qudget and we have had 

the opportunity to have a Health Saving Account to cover health expenses before 

meeting our deductible. Our premiums this last year have been $550. Per month 

for ourselves, our college age daughter, and our 25 year old son who has not had 

coverage through his work to date. 

I was not ever enthusiastic about a government run health care mandate or 

system. I understood that many people in our country could not afford health 

insurance or adequate health care. I was sympathetic to their plight and was 

willing to have our premiums go up marginally that others could have insurance. 

believed President Obama when he repeatedly stated that if we like our insurance 

we would be able to keep it, period! I never imagined what would happen to a 

middle class family like ours. 

In September of this year, I received a letter from Blue Cross Blue Shield of 

Arizona informing us that our plan was not grandfathered in and would not 

available at our renewal in January of 2014. They told us we would be able to 

move to another BCBSAZ plan at that time. Upon speaking to my insurance 

agent, I was told that we would have significantly more comprehensive insurance 

including maternity and pediatric dentistry which obviously is not useful for our 

family. He said the plan closest to ours that we have would still have a $6000. 

Deductible per person but the premium would now be $1701. Per month. To say 

the least, I was stunned by the increase. 
25 


Insert offset folio 8 here 86197.008

Since my husband and I are in real estate it is difficult to know what our income is 

from year to year. Over the last couple of years though, we have earned just over 

the $94,200. threshold that would allow us to benefit from any sort of subsidies. 

I also checked the Obamacare websight and used the subsidy calculator and 

found out that if our adjusted gross income was $95000. There would be no 

subsidy available and our approximate premium would be $1387. per month or 

$16,642. Per year which would be $17.5% of our household income. I then 

estimated that our adjusted gross income was $89,000. And I was given an 

estimate of $8,187. in subsidies by making $5000. less per year. This would equal 

9.5% of our household income. If we were to underestimate our adjusted gross 

and take advantage of the subsidy and then make more than that, we would then 

owe the entire subsidy back to the government. 

With premium increases like these, it is a total game changer for our family. The 

thought of health care premiums for healthy non-smokers costing between 17% 

and 20% of our income is unbelievable. We have been offered a reprieve from 

BCBSAZ until December 2014. This letter informing us of this came just last week. 

If nothing is done about the effect that Obamacare is having on the self-insured 

middle class then next year at this time we will be looking at these huge premium 

increases. That could for the first time in our lives, leave us uninsured or having to 

make life changing decisions. 

This is not what our President promised us. We have worked hard to provide for 

our family, be responsible, pay our bills and taxes. This is not playing out as we 

were told. We urge you to make changes to Obamacare that would prevent this 

from becoming our reality. 
26 


Insert offset folio 9 here 86197.009

D9994D 09/13 

September 24, 2013 

~amman 

Prescott, AZ 86303-5467 

'iI'IIII,IIII'I-h,'III'hllhlll'I"IIII'I'I'h"II'I"I'IoI'II' 

Dear Randall, 

With all the buzz about the Ilealthcare law and new changes that will start in 2014, you're 

probably wondering how you will be affected. 

Your current Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona (BCBSAZ) plan!s a 

non-grandfathered plan, meaning the plan was not In effect on or before 

March 23, 2010. This plan w!11 no longer be available starting on your renewal 

date in 2014', You wi!! be able to move to another BCBSAZ plan at that time. 

You can keep your current plan until your renewal date in 2014. 

You will be pleased to know that all new BCBSAZ plans will have coverage for doc1Q.( 

visits, hospital stays, maternity care, ~f..QQ.D.lJ&W. and prescriptions. Plus, 

covered preventive care provided by in-network providers, such as annual wellness visits 

and immunizations, are available at no additional out-of-pocket cost to you. 

Learn more now at azblue.com/Changesln2014 

You can also visit azblue,com to learn more about BCSBAZ plans and the federal 

government's new Health Insurance Marketplace. It was established to help you shop 

onhne for heafth insurance and to determine if you qualify for federal aId to help pay for 

premiums and other health plan costs 

Start now by visiting 8zblue.com/Changesln2014. Or if you prefer personal, one-on-one 

answers and assistance, feel free to call us at {877} 318-4693, Monday through Friday 

between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. 

~ MikeTllton 

Vice President, Sales 

*THIS LETTER SERVES AS YOUR NOTICE OF PLAN DISCONTINUANCE REQUIRED N{l' 

BY AR.S. § 20-1380(CII2l. 

OPEN ENROLLMENT IS OCTOBER 1, 20l3-MARCH 31, 2014 
27 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

[Applause.] 

Chairman ISSA. I will now recognize myself, first of all, for a 

point of privilege. 

I come to Arizona not as often as John McCain comes to San 

Diego. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman ISSA. But I want you to understand, we think of him 

often as our senator. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman ISSA. But I come to Arizona often, and I have come 

here for many, many years. But in the last three years, I have 

come here more often because of the murder of Brian Terry. In just 

a few days, we will have the third anniversary of the killing, the 

gunning down of Brian Terry with a weapon that was released to 

the drug cartels as a responsibility of Federal agents here in Arizona. So I note this day because it is another reason that Arizona 

is a place that I often find myself. 

The committee is dedicated to a lot of areas. Today, though, I 

think there are some questions that need to be asked of all four 

of you as representatives of people simply trying to insure or cover 

their family’s health care. 

Each one of you, more or less, mentioned the President’s ‘‘if you 

like your health care.’’ I want to ask you a question. Do you all like 

the health care you had a lot more now that you have seen the alternative? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Absolutely. I always liked it. 

Chairman ISSA. To a certain extent, weren’t we all—and I am 

going to ask each of you to answer yes or no. But we all sort of 

said, boy, we would sure like an improvement in health care. We 

all thought we ought to be able to do better, and now we have seen 

one alternative that apparently isn’t better, and it is making us appreciate what we had that, for the most part, Americans always 

thought we could do better. Would you say that is true, Mrs. Dalton? 

Ms. DALTON. Yes. In our case, we really appreciated what we had 

because Blue Cross almost denied me over what they were calling 

a pre-existing condition, and we were really relieved when we were 

able to work through that. We got additional documentation, and 

we got the insurance that we wanted. 

And so for us, from the beginning, we were very appreciative of 

it and were afraid for a moment there maybe we may not get it. 

So it really hurts me on a personal level to lose it because I worked 

so hard to get it. 

Chairman ISSA. Mrs. Robinson, you were previously covered 

under your husband, and I assume that you had a family policy. 

So it is only in the last couple of years, I am assuming, that you 

have taken the lead role in having to make these decisions. 

What has it been like for you seeing what you had versus what 

now you are facing once this short forbearance goes through and 

2014 passes? 

Ms. ROBINSON. It is very, very scary. I have worked really hard 

to be able to be retired. I am 59 years old. I am going to be 60 in 

a couple of months. 

28 

Chairman ISSA. All of you are telling us information that we 

would have guessed much younger. 

Ms. ROBINSON. Oh, your check is in the mail. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. ROBINSON. Anyway, so now this is putting a crimp on it. I 

am scared. When I first got that letter that my insurance was 

going to go up to $700-and-something, I cried because I thought 

what am I going to do? I live modestly. I don’t know what else I 

can cut out. 

Chairman ISSA. Dr. Montgomery, you said you kind of liked what 

you had before, and you are a healthcare professional, so you are 

probably the most knowledgeable. But I will repeat the question 

because it is one that for me, coming to the field, is important to 

understand. 

Before 2010 and during the debate, one in which the American 

Medical Association actually weighed in in favor of the Affordable 

Care Act, were you of the opinion that healthcare was a little 

messed up and we could make it better, and we should? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Well, first, I am not a real doctor. I am a veterinarian. But, yes —— 

Chairman ISSA. You know, being a veterinarian is somebody who 

takes care of mammals in a very, very wonderful way for a lot less 

than we take care of ourselves. So I am not sure you should ever 

sell short being a doctor simply because your patients don’t actually write the check. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. But sitting on a hospital board for so long and 

seeing the interaction or the meddling, you might want to call it, 

of the Federal Government, certainly there is a need for some of 

that, but you are dealing with a bureaucracy, or an ineptocracy, in 

my opinion, that doesn’t really look at solving the problem. 

I mean, certainly here are some rules and guidelines that you 

need to follow, but you have to bend those rules now and then to 

make it fit the patient, so to speak. 

Chairman ISSA. And you are talking mostly CMS, the Federal 

programs that your hospitals spend so much time working on. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Oh, yes. I could tell you stories, like what are 

you people thinking? It is just get out of here, let us deal with this, 

let us solve this problem. So, yes. 

But my health insurance, I never really needed it, but I knew it 

was there. That was the comfort, I knew it was there, and I lately 

started to need it, and it has been good. And now suddenly after 

30 years of paying into it, and I can’t have it anymore. I would 

rather they just left us alone and let us continue on. 

Chairman ISSA. Mrs. Hamman, I am going to ask you a question 

because you owned up to being, again, much older than you look. 

In the early 1960s, just as Medicare was being introduced, the cost 

of health care was 5 percent of the nation’s spending, or 5 percent 

of GDP. Today it is 18 percent, heading toward 20 under the Affordable Care Act within a matter of a year or two, and that is not 

dollars. That is actually the percentage of all of our wealth, meaning that the number you gave is actually pretty predictable, that 

20 percent of everything made is going to go toward healthcare if 

we don’t change the affordable part of healthcare. 

29 

In your view, and I know the doctor here has a lot of expertise, 

but in your view, is that what we should take back, is that we 

should put ‘‘affordable’’ into the affordable care promise? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Indeed, indeed. We had a plan that worked for us. 

The market for plans that worked for individuals, that is gone. 

Now it is one-size-fits-all, and we all must pay for what we have 

never paid for in the past. Even in my childbearing years, I didn’t 

have maternity coverage. We saved and we paid that out of pocket. 

Chairman ISSA. If you want them bad enough, you will pay for 

them? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Yes, yes. So I think for us, because we have been 

able to choose the kind of plan that works for our family, and now 

to have that choice taken from us, I was so surprised. 

At one point, I just wanted to mention—I probably should have 

put this in my testimony—but when I was talking to my agent at 

Blue Cross, he said—I said $1,700 a month, I can’t even imagine. 

He said, well, I would suggest you have your college-age daughter, 

take her off your plan and have her go on AHCCCS. And I thought 

we have always paid our own way. You really want us to put our— 

it just seemed like an absurd solution that the government is becoming responsible for yet more people and their healthcare instead of less. 

Chairman ISSA. Of course, if you took one less commission in 

that hypothetical situation, stayed and didn’t bother to do one sale, 

didn’t do one open house that might lead to a sale, you could qualify for $8,000 from your government while contributing a fraction 

less. 

Ms. HAMMAN. Right. 

Chairman ISSA. Only in America. 

Dr. Gosar? 

Mr. GOSAR. Ms. Hamman, I want to start with you because you 

led right into my questioning. So you sold real estate. 

Ms. HAMMAN. Yes. 

Mr. GOSAR. Everybody buys the same house, right? 

Ms. HAMMAN. No. 

Mr. GOSAR. So you custom that, right? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Yes. 

Mr. GOSAR. So you sit down, you find out what their need is, 

what they can afford, and you tailor that accordingly, right? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Correct. 

Mr. GOSAR. Okay. So what we have seen in government’s rollout 

here, whether it be Social Security, whether it be Medicare, whether it be Medicaid, it is a one-size-fits-all, and that has been our 

problem. And so now here we have something that is very, very 

personal. 

What do you see in this? Now that you look at it with a little 

different rose-tinted glasses now—I know they are not rose-tinted, 

but what do you see now and what are you suspicious of what is 

coming? Because you know this is just the tip of the iceberg, right? 

Ms. HAMMAN. I think for the first time, and I told you this when 

I first met you, this is the first time I have contacted my congressman, and I have never felt the need to. But this, I feel as if choices 

have been taken away from us, choices to do what is best for our 

family. And I think part of the alarming nature of it for us is it 

30 

came so quickly because it had not been talked about. Until we got 

those cancellation letters, we didn’t really know what was ahead of 

us, and we were told something that proved to not be true. 

I feel like in a community like Prescott, where there is not a lot 

of business there, a lot of self-employed people, a lot of self-insured 

people, we are speaking for a lot of people just like us in small communities and for the self-employed. 

Mr. GOSAR. Dr. Montgomery, I want to get with you. You brought 

up the portability. You travel along that border, and that is where 

most of my district is, venturing from Arizona to California to Nevada. In fact, Bullhead City is a river that divides Bullhead City 

from McLaughlin. So the hospital is on the Arizona side. 

This provides a huge problem, and you made mention that you 

would have to drive possibly 100 miles additionally to get care. 

How does that implicate? You sat on a hospital board. How does 

that implicate healthcare delivery? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Well, for emergencies, it is significant. I mean, 

if you have a real bona fide emergency, they are going to have to 

fly you to a center. That is quite expensive. I mean, it is like 

$10,000 for a helicopter ride. It varies, but it is very expensive. I 

know when my stepdaughter went into labor, it should be two-anda-half hours across the desert. My wife made it, I think, in just 

under two, at midnight on a Friday. I have never been in labor, but 

I can imagine that type of thing. 

You don’t have specialists in rural areas. If you need to see a 

specialist, you have to go out of town. And if some specialist will 

come to the areas, but some don’t, but you can travel. Like I said, 

for us to go to Palm Springs, the closest, is over 100 miles. 

Mr. GOSAR. So you are telling me a simple diabetic shock issue 

could end up in death. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Oh, yes. 

Mr. GOSAR. Yes, that is what I was getting to. 

Ms. Robinson, you were talking about employment. Is employment higher out in rural Arizona than in good downtown Phoenix 

or metropolitan areas across the country? 

Ms. ROBINSON. If I get an $8.00-an-hour job, I will be doing well. 

Mr. GOSAR. Yes, that is what I was thinking. This is really impacting us, and problems in actually finding that job. 

Ms. ROBINSON. Exactly. 

Mr. GOSAR. Would it cause you repose to know that since January 1st of this year, the majority of jobs are part-time jobs that are 

being placed into our economy? 

Ms. ROBINSON. I have understood that, and I realized again that 

that would probably be the best I could get, unless I got two jobs, 

as I think was stated previously. 

Mr. GOSAR. So the big thing we want to know is, you have to pay 

for these premiums. So somebody in our district—we are a pretty 

poor district. The bulk or 80 percent of our seniors are dual-eligibles, both Medicare and Medicaid dependent. So it would take a 

family three of those jobs that the President is talking about, two 

to pay for full-time wages and one to pay for the benefits. That is 

striking, isn’t it? 

31 

Ms. ROBINSON. It is ridiculous. It is ridiculous. I wish that 

Obama could put him in K–Mart, let him see what real life is like. 

He obviously has no clue, or doesn’t care, I don’t know. 

Mr. GOSAR. The First Lady said they don’t do charity. 

Ms. Dalton, one last question. The access to providers in Prescott, is it greater or less under this Unaffordable Care Act? 

Ms. DALTON. Oh, it is much less. We had a family doctor who 

was in practice for probably 40 years and retired, walked away 

from his practice, just locked the door and left, didn’t even try to 

sell the practice, 40 years investing in his practice and in his life, 

and he didn’t even try to sell it. 

We had six doctors—I also lost my gynecologist. He moved away, 

moved back east to be closer to family, locked the door on his practice and left. 

And it took us probably a good 8 to 10 months to find another 

doctor. Either they weren’t taking new patients. We finally see a 

nurse practitioner in a neighboring city. 

So it has been significant. The shortage of doctors is significant 

and notable. 

Mr. GOSAR. Thank you, Chairman. I will yield back. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you, Mr. Gosar. 

Mr. Franks? 

Mr. FRANKS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, I have some of my staff members here today— 

Lloyd Bostrum, Lisa Tessler, Sherry Ferrington, and Michael 

Jamison over here, along with the wonderful security. Part of Michael’s job is to keep me from getting shot, and I want to go on 

record saying I hope he does a very good job. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. FRANKS. But we really are grateful to our staff. This last few 

weeks, since it has become clear some of the different directions 

that Obamacare intends to take this nation, there have been a lot 

of calls come into our office, and they are quite different in nature, 

according to my staff, than they were some months past. We sometimes would get some calls criticizing us for being so vociferously 

against Obamacare, and now we are not getting those calls. But we 

are getting a lot of calls that reflect some of the perspectives that 

have been articulated here today, so I am seeing that happen in 

a big way. 

It occurs to me, Mr. Chairman, that the highway of history is littered with the wreckage of socialist enterprises. And yet it seems 

the only thing we learn from history is that we don’t learn from 

history much. It seems like we are not really paying much attention. And ironically, in this case, as in so many of the others, the 

ones that they were ostensibly trying to help, the poorest in our society, are the ones that are being hurt the most. 

My line of questioning goes like this. In all deference to the four 

of you as witnesses here, you do not represent the poorest in our 

society. You represent middle-class people who are out there getting the job done. The discussion here has been primarily financial, 

which is appropriate, but I think there is another aspect to this 

Obamacare that we really need to look at carefully, and that is 

what is going to happen to the actual delivery of care. 

32 

One of the dynamics in a socialist effort when the finances don’t 

add up, when people start complaining of the cost, they start working to diminish the kinds of services that are delivered, and that 

is my greatest concern about this situation is that doctors are simply going to say forget it, I am out of here, or that the bureaucrats 

are going to really make it difficult for, again, those in the lower 

economic echelons to be able to access care. 

So my first question to you, Dr. Montgomery, is innovation in 

health care, of course, has been one of the things that allows us 

to give the very best care at the cheapest cost and maintaining the 

dignity of the patient, which in my judgment is the goal of the 

healthcare system. Do you think that this is going to have a significant impact ultimately on the kind of care that some of the bureaucrats will allow to be offered, especially with the lower-income people that are on the exchanges? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Well, that I don’t know. First, no one in this 

country is denied care. I mean, the current system, if you are held 

in the ER, they have to take care of you. But now, the people that 

could not afford it are going to be taxed, when before they weren’t. 

So I am not sure how they are going to work that out. 

But it seems to me there could be a better way to provide—the 

whole goal of this was to be able to pay for this. A lot of hospitals— 

the standard at a hospital is to write off 50 percent of what they 

charge. That is standard across the industry. Hospitals were expensive, but that is not what they get paid. That is what they charge, 

but it is never what they get paid. Writing off 50 percent or more 

is standard. 

The burden on hospitals is these patients that can’t afford to pay 

because they are still required to take care of them. How that is 

going to work out, I really don’t know, but I can’t see any other 

way. Care is going to be limited in some fashion because I think 

fewer people are going to be able to pay for it. The government is 

supposed to step in and do that, but I don’t see any more money 

coming in for that. That is what the attempt is here, but I don’t 

think it is going to happen. So I really don’t know. I mean, that 

is the frightening part to me, is what is going to happen in a couple 

of years. 

Mr. FRANKS. Mr. Chairman, I guess the next area—the question 

may be a little bit premature. I am afraid that as we go forward, 

we are going to find out that not only is the Affordable Care Act 

unaffordable, but it is not very caring either. I am hoping that we 

can keep our eye on that because, after all, isn’t that the fundamental goal of health care? Sometimes I am always amazed that 

our friends on the left, who say that this is for the poor, forget how 

bad sometimes this actually hurts the poor, and I would like next 

time we have another round, Mr. Chair, to discuss some of the differences in the deductibilities or the trend there because I think 

that will be the other area they will try to make up cost. 

Chairman ISSA. We will. 

Mr. FRANKS. Thank you. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

Mr. Schweikert? 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

33 

In a series of different topics, Ms. Dalton, you almost started to 

cry and started to make me cry. That is just not fair. 

Ms. DALTON. I am so sorry. Thank you for the tissue, by the way. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. It is a loving group around here. 

As you were starting to touch on, and Ms. Robinson also touched 

on where you are income-wise, I don’t want you to share that on 

record, but as you started to tear up and walk through the impact 

it is having on you and your family’s life, part of what I think you 

were trying to share—and don’t let me put words in your mouth— 

is you are almost being boxed in, incentivized, forced to say if I will 

make less money, if I will game my life, I get this money. And yet 

you sounded very—as I hope everyone is—prideful, respectful, that 

you did not want to take that subsidy. Am I being fair? 

Ms. DALTON. That is right. We don’t want to take a subsidy. We 

didn’t spend all those years in school, my husband, to become proficient in a trade just so that he could take a subsidy. That is not 

what we want. And frankly, we find it abhorrent that we would 

spend that much time to become self-reliant only to then burden 

our children and our grandchildren to pay for something which two 

months ago we were handling just fine. 

And then to find out that even if we did have no problems ideologically with the exchange, even if we were comfortable with that, 

to find out that we go on and we only get $250 worth of help, it 

is still—what are we going to do? We can’t afford the exchange. We 

can’t afford individual policies. What? Medicaid? Is that where we 

are headed, being professionals and well-educated professionals? 

Why is it that the government has transformed itself into an instrument of plunder? It has taken from us our plan. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Look, you are approaching a very powerful 

point here. 

Ms. Hamman? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Yes. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. I wanted to make sure because Chairman Issa 

started to touch on it, but that everyone sort of understands the 

math, and I am doing this as you were sort of sharing. If you will 

make $6,000 less, you get $8,167? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Right. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. So you are literally—so if you manage your life 

so when you hit your income you just stop, you actually make 

money by minimizing your productivity. 

Wow, the absurdity of it. Darrell, when he introduced me, we 

spend a lot of our time fixated on economic growth and are often 

doing this, and this is going to be probably the next set of hearings 

we are going to have to hold in the beginning of the year, of what 

it is doing there. 

Dr. Montgomery, remember, the GPA for vet students is substantially higher than human medical schools. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. We like to think so. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. That is what all my vet friends tell me, particularly when they are handing me their bill. 

Now, you have been on a hospital board. The hospital was actually on the California side of the Colorado River? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, yes. 

34 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. So you were under MediCal. In Arizona, there 

is a healthcare cost containment system which we call AHCCCS, 

which is a little unique because we buy capitated HMO policies. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. I am not that familiar with how it works, but 

similar programs. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. The data that has been presented to our offices 

recently, back in September when we were trying to grind through 

how to get this message out, is that in just a couple of years, the 

doctors who were at the hospital you were on the board of will be 

paid more to see a Medicaid patient and an AHCCCS patient than 

a Medicare patient, and much of the compensation will actually 

come through, I understand, some of the exchange providers. It is 

almost a perversity where now the adjustments on compensation, 

you are almost being incentivized to push people to go on to those 

subsidies. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Right, like a single-payer system. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Who knows whether that is ultimately where 

we are being driven? 

Mr. Chairman, I will yield back. 

Chairman ISSA. Dave, I want to thank you. It is interesting, the 

other day, this week, we had a hearing that was on the Affordable 

Care Act, but it was really on government intervention, what the 

effects were, and I was shocked that my ranking member and a 

couple of colleagues on that side, they actually started saying ‘‘single payer’’ under their breath, which I felt perfectly willing to mention, because that is what they really wanted. That was what they 

wanted. It is just this was their incremental step, and it is a little 

surprising to some people, but that actually is what my members, 

Democratic members said during an open hearing. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, be that if it may that that is 

what they wanted, wouldn’t it have been nice if they had actually 

been truthful about that? 

Chairman ISSA. Well, Mr. Kucinich was. But for the most part, 

others were not. 

Doctor, I am going to recognize myself for a short second round. 

Having been on a hospital board, I am going to take hospitals to 

task for a moment because there are two areas that concern me 

that are affecting government intervention today, and they came 

out of our hearing earlier. 

One was that the Federal Government currently pays more for 

the exact same procedure if you do it in a hospital than in a doctor’s office or a clinic. Are you aware of that? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. No, I was not aware of that. 

Chairman ISSA. It is the reason that in urban areas, including 

San Diego, large amounts of clinics are closing and doctors are 

being brought into hospital practices so they can do the exact same 

procedure. And, by the way, if they do it under certain rules, they 

may still be doing it in the clinic, but the clinic is now considered 

a hospital. 

So what you end up with is the Federal Government simply reimbursing at a higher level, and you have an experience with that. 

You have seen, I gather from your earlier comments, that the existing Federal programs—Medicare and Medicaid being the largest— 

35 

they often cause you to make decisions because you can get paid 

more for doing it one way than doing it another. Isn’t that true? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Oh, absolutely. You are talking about the 

DRGs coding, the diagnostic related groups. It is a game. A patient 

comes in with a problem—well, don’t diagnose it as that, diagnose 

it as this because you get reimbursed more for it. I mean, hospitals 

are very labor intensive, so they have to pay all these nursing staff 

because Federal mandates require a certain level of staffing which 

may or may not be realistic. So it is just a big game that they all 

play, and everybody knows they are playing it. It is just a game 

that they play. 

Talking to some physicians, a lot of physicians don’t want to go 

into private practice because of all the rules and the regulations 

and the paperwork. They just want to practice medicine, so they 

are going to work in hospitals. They just get to practice medicine 

and the hospital handles all the paperwork. 

If I may, getting back to Mr. Franks’ question as an example, 

and this really happened, but as an example of the thinking on the 

Federal side, there is a small rural hospital. They don’t have a fulltime surgeon. The surgeon comes from another town about 50 

miles away, a larger hospital. There are multiple surgeons. In 

terms of level of care, the small rural hospital is a primary care 

facility. This other hospital is like a secondary care facility. The 

surgeon is in the small town performing surgery and he receives 

a call from the other hospital—hey, we have a boy who needs an 

appendectomy. This is an emergency. Can we ship him down and 

you can do it down there. Sure, send him on down. That is breaking rule number 1. 

So the boy arrives. The doctor is in surgery. He is talking 

through his mask, admit the boy. So they admit him into the hospital, into a bed. As soon as he is ready, they wheel him in and 

they do the appendectomy. That is breaking rule number 2. 

The CMS had a conniption fit over this because you are breaking 

two —— 

Chairman ISSA. That is a technical term? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. What? Conniption fit? 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Because you are basically breaking two rules. 

Number 1, never in any case should you send from a secondary 

care hospital a case to a primary care hospital. I mean, why would 

you? There is more care, there is more availability of care, there 

is a greater level of care there. 

Second, it is an emergency. He can’t be admitted to the hospital. 

He has to go through the emergency room and wait there and then 

go in. You don’t get admitted until after surgery. But it is more expensive to go through the ER, and he has already had all the blood 

work and the diagnosis. We are just getting the bed ready, and as 

soon as we are ready we will wheel him on in. 

The care providers were more than happy to provide the care and 

were diligent in doing so, but the Federal bureaucrats that got on 

to this—I mean, it lasted for months, phone calls, emails, I mean 

just crazy, because you didn’t follow the rules. But we solved the 

problem. We resolved the issue. It doesn’t matter; you didn’t follow 

the rules. 

36 

Chairman ISSA. So the problem with the Federal Government is 

that rules-based rather than common sense by the actual providers 

—— 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Right. And so I can’t see the Federal Government now—I can only see the delivery of care from that side going 

down. 

Chairman ISSA. Let me ask one more question, and you may 

know better than the others. Under the Affordable Care Act, there 

is an elimination of physician-owned hospitals. They are no longer 

allowed. Is Arizona an area in which, particularly in rural areas, 

physician-owned hospitals are often part of the solution historically? Or even suburban? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. I really—I have only been associated with 

public hospitals or corporate-owned hospitals, never physicianowned. 

Chairman ISSA. Here in Phoenix you do have the Mayo Clinic 

Annex, right? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. I am from Blythe. But, yes. 

Chairman ISSA. The funny thing is, the Mayo Clinic, I understand, was the Mayo brothers, wasn’t it? It was physicians caring 

enough to start a hospital. 

And with that, I go back to Dr. Gosar. 

Mr. GOSAR. This is just perfectly leading in. 

Dr. Montgomery, so you are aware of what is coming down the 

road. I mean, I am not going to make this easy for people because 

a number of our folks coming forward, this is your first dealing 

talking to Congress and talking about government. So there are 

things like the SGR, the sustainable growth rate. Are you familiar 

with that? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Not —— 

Mr. GOSAR. It is actually compensating physicians that aren’t 

compensated originally because the government underpays them. 

There is something like $180 billion to that, wherever you can find 

that chump change around. Okay? 

We also have an IPAB board, which gets me back to your conniption fit. Okay? So you are going to have unelected bureaucrats coming together to tell you what you can do and what you can’t do, so 

redefining choice again to each of the ladies that we were talking 

about earlier. Okay? 

I also want to ask you, where in this bill was there tort reform? 

Are you familiar with any tort reform —— 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. I never read it, either. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GOSAR. Well, I am glad that you—even if you did, we were 

having a conversation —— 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. But I am aware that it is not there. 

Mr. GOSAR. There is none, there is none. So I guess my point to 

get to here is that I am a dentist. I believe that we need to have 

health insurance reform, but we need something different. 

We just had this hearing on Wednesday, and the Chairman said 

I was having way too much fun, so I am going to have a little more 

fun today. Okay? Because there are opportunities to get back to 

square one. 

37 

Number one is it has to be patient-friendly and patient-centered 

because that is what we are talking about. You want your doctor 

to epitomize what is special about each one of you and choreograph 

a health care that is based off of you, and I am going to pick on 

myself. 

I am allergic to wheat. They had some nice doughnuts today. I 

abstained because I am allergic to wheat. Okay? I want a 

healthcare industry that comes to me and says, ‘‘Dr. Gosar, because 

you are allergic to wheat, you have a seven times greater chance 

of getting any type of lymphoma, and we know that lymphomas are 

easily diagnosed early on. So how about, Dr. Gosar, if we have 

you’’—you know, doctors don’t live by their own rules. I mean, we 

are the worst patients ever. 

But if you were to get diagnostics twice in three years, we are 

going to give you an incentive, does that sound rational to you 

folks? 

Okay, so here is where you want to go. This is what doesn’t make 

sense about this law, these common denominators. I want the insurance company to work for me, not to work for the man, not to 

work for the government, which is what they do right now. Okay? 

Look at your plans. They are all the same. I want them tailormade to me. Okay? That is called reform and repeal, McCarranFerguson. The only person that is talking about it in Congress, 

right here. What it does is allows the Federal Government to break 

up the insurances to make them compete just like we as doctors 

do. Wouldn’t that be something, doc? Actually have them competing 

for our business. 

What is that? It is true. Number two is - 

[Disturbance in hearing room.] 

Chairman ISSA. I apologize, but only the witnesses can respond. 

Mr. GOSAR. We want to make sure that we have the opportunity 

to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges. 

[Disturbance in hearing room.] 

Mr. GOSAR. No. It is perfect information. 

Chairman ISSA. Only the witnesses on the dais can respond in 

the hearing, please. 

Mr. GOSAR. We want to get everybody on the playing field. So 

what we have coming—and we want tax reform that your money 

is better spent accordingly. So that is why there is opportunities to 

make something better. 

Healthcare isn’t a Republican issue. It is not a Democratic issue. 

It is not an Independent issue. It is an American issue. And what 

we have is a failing system. I said it earlier: Medicare is failing, 

Medicaid is failing, Social Security is failing because government 

hasn’t looked at the parameters of increasing age, increasing technology, and not working with us accordingly. 

Part of that responsibility is also us as citizens for not holding 

elected officials accountable, and that is why I complimented you 

folks for coming out today and holding us accountable, because that 

is what you need to do. That is a very, very important aspect. 

So a real quick question, Mrs. Dalton. In regards to what I was 

just talking about, this IPAB board that will restrict what you can 

actually have and do, how is that going to hurt your options in 

rural Arizona, in Prescott? 

38 

Ms. DALTON. I am not sure I understand the question. 

Mr. GOSAR. So if what they are going to do is limit what you can 

actually provide services for, and now you have fewer services 

being provided and fewer companies providing, is that going to 

make it cheaper or more expensive? 

Ms. DALTON. Oh, it makes it much more expensive. In fact, my 

agent told me that because of the demographics of where we live, 

that getting the same procedure done in Yavapai County is $200 

or $300 more expensive than if we were to come down to Maricopa 

County. So there is a huge disparity there, even on the exchanges. 

They are much cheaper to enter in Phoenix than they are for us 

in Prescott. 

Mr. GOSAR. How would you feel, Mrs. Robinson? 

Ms. ROBINSON. I would feel the same. We are very limited. 

Mr. GOSAR. Ms. Hamman? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Yes. I mean, we have limited health providers, and 

I think it will only become more of a problem as we move forward. 

Mr. GOSAR. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

Mr. Franks? 

Mr. FRANKS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, I think it is important sometimes to try to come back 

to Earth and ask ourselves what is the overall ultimate overarching goal of healthcare policy. Isn’t it to try to see everyone be 

able to have the best healthcare at the least cost that maintains 

their dignity as much as possible? I think that is the real question. 

Sometimes I am afraid that our friends on the left would say, well, 

you know, everyone has a right to health care. But what they really mean is that I have a right to make you pay for my health care, 

and that ultimately doesn’t work out very well. Even if there is a 

basic disconnect, it doesn’t work out well in practice. 

You know, in England, Mr. Chairman, they have a government 

controlled healthcare system, and if you have a cold, you call a doctor. If you have cancer or heart problems, you call a travel agent. 

You want to get out of there and come where they can help. There 

is now an effort among the people there to kind of go around the 

system, and that leaves, unfortunately, most of the poorest people 

in the society that are the least capable of doing these things sort 

of at the mercy of the government system. 

Dr. Gosar’s point about IPAB I think is the biggest single consideration here. Just as free enterprise is sometimes criticized, Mr. 

Chairman, as being the unequal distribution of wealth, socialism 

has always been the equal distribution of poverty. And I am concerned that in this desire to make universal health care under government control for universal health care, we are going to have instead of the unequal distribution of the best health care sometimes, 

which I wish we could fix, we are going to have the equal distribution of poor health care. 

Mr. Chairman, it has a greater impact on our society as well. In 

Europe, our poverty level is their average income. 

So I just have to say to you, I don’t know where we are headed 

here, and it looks to me like it is really dangerous for us to suggest 

that a government that cannot build a website is all of a sudden 

39 

now capable of handling the entire complexity of the healthcare 

system. 

The bottom line here is I think that the government is going to 

have to try to create ways to make the numbers that don’t work, 

work. We have already heard about the premiums. So I would like 

to ask each of the witnesses what do they think their opinions are 

related to the deductibilities that will be in these healthcare systems; and, of course, Dr. Gosar’s point, of the kinds of healthcare 

that might be restricted to reduce the costs in an inefficient government-run system? 

Chairman ISSA. Could you suspend for just a moment? 

I would like to announce to the audience—perhaps I should have 

been more strict early on—this is a Federal Government hearing 

under the rules that we all live under. So, please, no response from 

the audience. We would appreciate your continued understanding 

that this is an exchange simply between members on the dais and 

the witnesses, and I would ask everyone to respect that or to leave 

the room. I thank you. 

You may answer. 

You had the question? 

Mr. FRANKS. Just was wanting to ask the witnesses to tell me— 

as you know, again, it may be a premature question. We know 

about the premium impact, the sort of sticker shock on the premium. But what about it seems to me that one of the next steps 

will be to try to increase the deductibilities and try to ameliorate 

the premium issue, and then ultimately to try to restrict care to 

make the numbers work. Do any of you have any insight on the 

deductibility issues? 

Ms. DALTON. Well, I know for us, the plan that we were told— 

we were told the one that we had originally chosen was gone and 

it didn’t exist anymore. We had chosen a high deductible plan, and 

the one that was quoted to us as being closest to what we already 

had was that 320 percent increase in premium, and the deductible 

was lower. So they are trying to kind of recoup things there. 

As far as quality of care, I think it is premature for me to say. 

I don’t know what kind of quality of care we might see, if it will 

be reduced or not. But I can say that since our doctor of 12 years 

retired, we have had to settle for a nurse practitioner in a neighboring city. And, you know, she is a fine human being, but it is not 

the relationship we once had. It is not the expertise that we once 

enjoyed. So I can only think that perhaps that might be the trend. 

I don’t know. 

Does that answer your question? 

Mr. FRANKS. If anyone else has any particular insight? 

[No response.] 

Mr. FRANKS. No? 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

Mr. Schweikert? 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

But leading right off of where Trent was, Ms. Hamman, when 

you looked at your alternatives in policies, did you maintain the relationship with your same doctor? 

40 

Ms. HAMMAN. If I stay with Blue Cross Blue Shield. We live in 

a small town. Blue Cross Blue Shield is accepted by most doctors. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. 

Dr. Montgomery? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Again, I am not sure. I haven’t been able to —— Mr. SCHWEIKERT. You have a unique geographic issue which actually is fascinating for a number of our communities out here in 

the West where you cross state jurisdictions. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Correct. And I don’t know the answer. I 

haven’t been able to find out for sure. I just know when I access 

Blue Shield of California, which was the provider of most of the 

plans available, and look for providers, and you put in the zip code 

of the town, it says ‘‘Not a Valid Address.’’ And I am not certain 

if the doctors on the Arizona side will take that, or if they will be 

allowed to. I just don’t know. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. We will have staff research that. 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. That certainly is of concern to me. I mean, if 

they do, it is maybe not that big an issue. But I do know that the 

premium is going up, and the out-of-pocket is going to go up. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. 

Ms. Robinson, I know you spent some time looking at what your 

alternatives were, and I accept in rural Arizona you have a lot 

fewer medical professionals. Were you able to keep the individuals 

you have relationships with? 

Ms. ROBINSON. I called my clinic, and they are not totally sure. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. 

Ms. ROBINSON. So I don’t know yet. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Ms. Dalton? 

Ms. DALTON. I have not inquired into that. Like Mrs. Hamman, 

I just assume that being Blue Cross Blue Shield, everyone takes 

them. I don’t think there will be changes in the doctor that we 

have to see at this point. It is just a question of how we are going 

to be able to afford to pay for it. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. We actually have some interesting numbers that we have been working on, as we started to touch on before. In Arizona, our Medicaid system is called AHCCCS, and it 

looks like folks enrolled in AHCCCS plans will actually have more 

medical choices than a lot of those who maintain private insurance, 

which is sort of a fascinating irony. 

Doctor, you have sort of a unique situation because you have 

lived somewhat within the bureaucracy. When you talk to folks, because obviously you are from the medical—you have been on the 

hospital board, are you running into discussions about keeping my 

doctor, the cost, the portability, those relationships? 

Dr. MONTGOMERY. Well, I have been off the board for about five 

years. But in talking to people in the community, yes, that is a concern. But that is of concern to people, yes. But I am not certain 

what effect it is having directly, the nuts and bolts and numbers. 

No, I don’t know. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. 

Ms. Hamman, you were buying directly from Blue? 

Ms. HAMMAN. From —— 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Blue Cross Blue Shield? 

41 

Ms. HAMMAN. Yes. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. Had you looked at any other—were 

there any other opportunities for you—the Realtors Association— 

anything else you were able to find out? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Well, it was how we started with Blue Cross Blue 

Shield. Originally, it started many years ago as a plan that we 

came in through the Association of Realtors. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. You actually beat me to it because that is how 

my wife and I were carrying ours for a long time. 

Ms. HAMMAN. Right, right, right. So, and I think there was a 5 

percent discount back then. It is not there now. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. And what other alternatives did you look at? 

Ms. HAMMAN. Well, in our panic—we have a January 1 renewal. 

So when I got that letter at the end of September, I had to have 

something in place by January 1st. And so in my panic of trying 

to find health care and realizing what this is now meaning for our 

family and the changes, we looked at United Healthcare and Blue 

Cross. Those were what we were spending some time on. We were 

desperately trying to see if we could get on a plan that would start 

sometime in December in ’13 that would buy us a year, and gratefully Blue Cross Blue Shield extended our plan. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Because of that —— 

Ms. HAMMAN. But that was just last week we got those letters. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. And at least for the next 12 months, you will 

be —— 

Ms. HAMMAN. We have 12 months of reprieve here, but we will 

be looking at these numbers if nothing is changed. 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT. All right. And, Mr. Chairman, knowing the 

rule that when the yellow light is on, talk faster—believe it or not, 

that is what we say—one of the things that I want to make sure 

whoever is trying to get their heads around the size and scale of 

this issue, much of the last month we have all fixated on the 

website. The website was worthy of talking about because it was 

a very easy discussion of a point of access, a point to get there. But 

it is a tiny issue in the scale of what we are talking about. 

I know Dr. Gosar has been absolutely a champion on the mechanics of how do we access our doctors, how do we make it affordable, those things. Many of us have been trying to fixate on what 

does it do in the cascade effect of economic growth. We are just 

starting to learn. Literally every day, we run into someone who 

throws a new wrinkle in crossing state lines. 

Even for members like us who have spent the last couple of years 

doing town halls, talking about what was coming and—forgive 

me—having people from the audience yelling at us that we weren’t 

telling the truth, and the truth is here. You know, we said this was 

coming, and it showed up. Now we would love to have our brothers 

and sisters on the other side actually be willing to work with us 

instead of just saying no. 

And with that, I yield back. Thank you. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. I thank you for your closing remarks. 

Mr. Gosar, do you have any closing comments? 

Mr. GOSAR. Well, I am glad that everybody is out here. I appreciate it. We would love to have a bigger venue to have more people 

come. But I think this is a venue that you can start to hear some 

42 

of your colleagues and your constituents about actual complaints, 

about what is transpiring. 

I hope that you will take the opportunity and come to a town hall 

someday, or come out to coffee with your congressman, and bring 

your notebook and your ideas, because one of the things that I will 

tell you I look forward to is reaching out to you because Congress 

doesn’t know all the right answers. I think all the right answers 

are right outside, right out there, like in the gallery. We just need 

to be able to come forward. 

I want to applaud Ms. Hamman, Ms. Dalton, Ms. Robinson, and 

Dr. Montgomery for coming forward and sharing your stories. 

The last two things. Starting January 1st, the definition of fulltime worker now is 30 hours a week, not anything above, 30 hours 

a week. So this is going to change. Next year we see the employer 

mandate start complying, just like the individual mandate. So this 

becomes compounded. So everything that you are witnessing as individuals, you will see now on the employer side. No people are 

barred from that extravaganza. 

So, thank you very much for coming out here. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

Mr. Franks? 

Mr. FRANKS. Well, thank you first, Mr. Chairman, for this hearing. I think it has been a great hearing, and I also am always 

grateful to be on the same dais with my other colleagues here. 

I want to thank the people who provided our security and just 

all of you that came here today. With all of the differences that we 

have, it is probably important to remind ourselves that true tolerance is not in pretending we have no differences. It is being kind 

and decent to each other in spite of those differences and trying to 

search for the truth the best that we can because this idea of 

America is unique in the history of the world, and we are the most 

blessed people, I believe, on the planet, and I believe that we will 

find our way through these challenges. 

But it is probably important to remind us, remind ourselves, that 

this notion of the reason that government is instituted among men 

is to protect those things like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those seem like simple concepts, almost pass? concepts, but 

they are the foundation of everything because they incent productivity and they are the concepts that are the ones that have 

dragged more of the poor people of this country out of poverty and 

into the best lifestyle that any people have ever had than any other 

system, and it is important that we don’t jettison that now. 

The reason that this issue of Obamacare has been so significant 

is because it is the antithesis of this idea of a free, noble, and productive people that are responsible and move forward to do the 

best they can while doing everything that we can to look after our 

brothers and sisters as we go. That is the great miracle of America, 

and I think it is not time to raise the white flag yet. But recent 

situations do remind us that we had better be very vigilant in the 

elections and in the policies that we move forward on in the future. 

Thank you all very much for being here, and thank you again, 

Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ISSA. Thank you. 

43 

I would like to also echo the earlier comments. I want to thank 

our witnesses. I certainly want to thank our audience for being respectful. I appreciate our host, including law enforcement here 

today, for hosting this hearing. 

I am going to close with something that I am taking home as a 

takeaway from all four of you. To the greatest extent possible, it 

appears as though your reprieve is simply signing up to last year’s 

plan and extending it for most of next year. That means that there 

is a time bomb ticking on our witnesses here today, one that does 

not get them past December 31st of next year. And when full implementation of the Affordable Care Act goes into effect on the last 

day of December, just three days before if we are reelected we 

would be sworn in, it will be too late to save the programs that you 

are, in many cases, staying extended in. 

Additionally, the way the law worked, the calculations of all the 

benefits and costs were based on an assumption that you would not 

stay in your old plan. The old plans that in some cases you are extending are less expensive, but it means that that savings that you 

are enjoying, and rightfully so, means that a similar cost by you 

not going into the other plan, meaning that these Federally-subsidized plans are going to be more expensive as a result, or lose 

money. 

That recognition is in stark contrast to something that we who 

have worked as Federal employees are aware of. FEHBP, the system that every Federal employee and postal worker has access to, 

will be going up by modest amounts this year. The 8 million men 

and women who work for the Federal Government, including the 

Post Office, will get as much as 82 percent of that cost reimbursed, 

but those programs are less expensive than any of the programs 

you here today testified that you are going to be forced into next 

year. 

That concerns me, that the program that the President of the 

United States is in, FEHBP, Secretary Kerry, Secretary Hagel, and 

all the way up and down the line of, as I said, all Federal civilian 

employees are in, is currently affordable and, in fact, stable. It is 

my goal to try to use the contrast over the next few months, along 

with the committees that many of us serve on, to begin offering 

comprehensive alternatives that are free market and that will 

hopefully give you the kinds of programs you want, which may not 

include your care or things that you don’t have and don’t want. 

And that is going to be a goal. 

I am going to close by saying I respect the Supreme Court even 

if I don’t believe I would make the same decision if I were honored 

to be on the Court. We will also hold this president accountable 

that he has to respect the body we serve in, and we will do everything we can to try to encourage meaningful change and reform 

that will lead to affordable care for the American people and, to the 

greatest extent possible, private choice, something that I believe 

Americans believe is fundamentally one of their greatest rights. 

And with that, we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ